Database Users

[Q] Would u like Quad or Dual in your next note?

Since the launch of SGS3 is around the corner and the next note will probably come within next few months, I thought of starting this thread to know how many users prefer having Quad Exynos 4 ( similar to SGS3 which is based on A9 arcitecture with Mali 400 GPU built using 32nm manufacturing process) or dual Exynos 5 (A15 architecture with Mali T604 GPU which is based on probably 28nm manufacturing process)in our next Note...
Cast your votes in the poll

You should put a POLL, it would get more people interested. But for me, I'd rather get the A15 with the Mali 604T since A15 is supposedly to be 40% faster than A9 and the Mali 604T will blow the Mali 400 away.

Definitely the dual A15 with Mali 604. No doubt.
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

I dont see any benifit by haveing a quad core cpu. Most apps dont even use the duel core.
Cant fault my note at all. So just the new duel will do with less battery drain
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

Quad! I don't care if I don't use it, and I don't care if I don't need it.
It just feels good to have that much power in the palm of your hand.
I'll benefit from that much power since I play games and I look forward to more capable emulators in the future.

I don't give a CRAP about the amount of cores!
I want the most speed that's possible, if that would be with dthe dual i take that, if it's with de quad, then thats my way to go...
Can't vote in the poll because i want speed, and since it's not sure wich one is faster i can't vote!
PS
I think the Exynos 5 will be released @ the end of this year, and the Exynos 4 tomorow
If that's correct i go with the Exynos 4, i hate waiting

what the note lacks is a decent GPU. the current GPU can't efficiently handle the 1280x800 pixels. however what i want more than anything is 1. non-pentile screen that is FLAWLESS and 2. a bigger battery still ~3000 mAh like the RAZR max. I would gladly sacrifice a few mm for a larger battery. I find it stupid how HTC decided to go with a slim and NON-REMOVABLE battery and storage to save a few mm. Seriously? This is why HTC is falling in a deep pit.

Exynos 5 dual, it has more power and is more efficient
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA

EASILY the A15 with the T-604! Come to papa!

The fastest clock speed and the best GPU is all that matters. 2.2 ghz 2 core with a fab GPU will blow away a 10 core 1.0 ghz with a bad gpu everyday every way.

How about the beast Quad Core A15 Exynos 5450 with Mali T-658? Ok, ok, I know technically it hasn't been built yet and will probably be for tablets, but wouldn't mind seeing it in the Note since it is a tab/phone hybrid.
But as for the current SoC's available now, I would take the A15 dual Exynos 5250 with Mali T-604.
More likely, I think Samsung's road map would be to release the flagship Galaxy S lines (in this case the GS 3) with the latest SoC's, then the next Note (Note 2 in this case) would get a slight spec bump based on the Galaxy S 3 with a faster clocked CPU/GPU combo of the Galaxy S 3 line 6 months later, then the GS4 would get next Gen SoCs with the Note 3 getting a spec bump of the GS 4 SoCs, etc.....

I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.

With a single core my galaxy s with ics is snappier than my note. Finally its the software I guess.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA

Mystic38 said:
I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Android multitasking would need to be vastly different than what it is today, and on top of this the RAM specs need a major bump to even begin to show advantages in multi-core processing.
Also like you said, it has not mattered for deskptops and laptops what the real-world benefits are, just what the consumer feels about the value in their purchase. Nowadays it seems people are more concerned with the number of cores as opposed to the clock speed.
I do like the approach that Ti has taken with the OMAP in dedicating low-power cores to low-power functions, and feel that it really has potential in mobile devices, but they seem to be a step behind when it comes to the bigger tasks of mobile processing. Intel being on the cusp of Haswell has me excited to see what they can do in this territory.
Dual Exynos 5 for me at the moment.

It'll be interesting to see how they market this dual core a15 processor because joe public, will always think more cores is better. I do feel though that the note 2 might not have the same internals as the s3, like our notes had the same as the s2. For the note they seemed to put in all the best tech they had on offer at the tine, so if the a15 is ready to go by November time then I think they'll defo use it unless something better is available.

Dual core with speed.
Quad cores mean squat if they slow the primary usage down.

I'd rather get a dual than a quad even if its on the same generation and process so long as it is clocked higher. Give me a smaller process, newer gen chip and better gpu? There is no choice.

Id go for the i7 3960x and gtx 690 if they can squeeze that in the next note but I think I wont get a choice and will just end up with whatever Samsung puts into the note 2.

Mystic38 said:
I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you....the main reason I created this thread, because I wanted to know how many members actually know the effect of system architecture and the manufacturing process will affect the day to day performance of the device, battery consumption etc.,it was never about the software but I know it everything comes to the OS how deeply it is integrated with the hardware and how effectively it co-ordinates with them...this is why Apple's devices are snappier than the android...the problem here is Samsung is more concerned about bringing more devices out than focusing on the system's deep integration...so it only comes to the fact that the thread is only about the hardware... but the discussion about the embedded systems is also welcomed....

adelmundo said:
How about the beast Quad Core A15 Exynos 5450 with Mali T-658? Ok, ok, I know technically it hasn't been built yet and will probably be for tablets, but wouldn't mind seeing it in the Note since it is a tab/phone hybrid.
But as for the current SoC's available now, I would take the A15 dual Exynos 5250 with Mali T-604.
More likely, I think Samsung's road map would be to release the flagship Galaxy S lines (in this case the GS 3) with the latest SoC's, then the next Note (Note 2 in this case) would get a slight spec bump based on the Galaxy S 3 with a faster clocked CPU/GPU combo of the Galaxy S 3 line 6 months later, then the GS4 would get next Gen SoCs with the Note 3 getting a spec bump of the GS 4 SoCs, etc.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I heard that Note 10.1 tablet is being delayed because Samsung wanted the device with quad than dual...so there is a little chance that the next Hybrid Note will come with some other spec....

[SAMSUNG] To Unveil [8-CORE] ARM Chip

Eight cores, in a mobile processor? Balderdash! But according to EETimes, that's just what Samsung's planning on unveiling in February at the International Solid-State Circuits Conference (that sounds so exciting).
Now before you get too excited, this isn't - technically speaking - an eight-core processor. It's a dual quad-core, which is to say, a two-processor chip. The design is based on a reference architecture thought up by ARM themselves, dubbed "big.little," and is designed to combine the light-load battery life of a high-efficiency quad-core 28nm ARM A7 chip with a super-hi-po A15 processor for heavy lifting. The exact specifications, for our nerdier readers, are: 1 quad-core ARM A7 chip clocked at 1.2GHz for everyday tasks, and 1 quad-core ARM A15 chip clocked at 1.8GHz w/ 2MB L2 cache for processor-intensive tasks like video games.
ARM itself has said the "big.little" project is delivering benefits beyond those expected when the architecture was initially announced, and Samsung's chip should be the first on the market based on the concept. So yes, this will be a new Exynos of some sort.
Should you expect this chip in the Galaxy S IV (or whatever Samsung's going to call it - because that's far from a given)? It's possible, but not necessarily likely. The gap between chip announcement and tape-out (mass-production readiness) can be lengthy. With the first batch of Exynos 5 Dual devices just now hitting the market in the form of the new Samsung Chromebook and Nexus 10, this eight-core beast may not be ready in time for the next "next big thing." Samsung could very well specifically be targeting this chip for Chromebooks and Windows RT / Android tablets before taking a dive into smaller form factors, too.
Either way, it's exciting business - I can't say I ever tire of technology getting faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to be honest lately i have started to lose interest in Samsung due to the whole exynos issue and lack of support for developers but if this is to be true then i feel comfortable in making my next device a Samsung (only with this chip ovcourse) lets hope we see this chip come to more devices if it is infact released we will have to wait and see what samsung brings us in 2013 to decide if our loyalty to samsung is acctually worth it
courtesy of android police

What relavance to the S3 does this have??? Nothing. Keep it in the General section not the S3 General section...
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium

Not excited. Most apps today are optimized for single and dual cores, rarely on quad. And now octal??

Well if you read its not a true 8 core processor. It is two CPU's both quad core. One being an A15 @1.8GHz and the other an A7 @1.2GHz
Sent from my SGH-I897 using xda premium

Yes and Intel working on a 48 core chip.
Also it doesn't matter if the application you are running isn't designed for multi cores, most of the time this isn't even possible. People are still forgetting that one application isn't EVERYTHING that runs on a CPU, there are a lot of processes that run at the same time and thus benefit from multi core architecture.
Someone please move this useless thread.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

b-eock said:
Well if you read its not a true 8 core processor. It is two CPU's both quad core. One being an A15 @1.8GHz and the other an A7 @1.2GHz
Sent from my SGH-I897 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's still a octa-core if you want to be anal about the definition, one of the hacks in kernels with this device SoC will be to run all cores in asymmetric multiprocessor modes.
But anyway the timing coincides with the 5450 rumors we've been hearing. Either they have two discrete quad A15 SoCs or they're both the same thing.

AndreiLux said:
It's still a octa-core if you want to be anal about the definition, one of the hacks in kernels with this device SoC will be to run all cores in asymmetric multiprocessor modes.
But anyway the timing coincides with the 5450 rumors we've been hearing. Either they have two discrete quad A15 SoCs or they're both the same thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow that sounds super exciting. Great piece of info. Now its time for google to really optimize android for multi core processors
《Samsung rom》
---------- Post added at 08:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 PM ----------
sfjuocekr said:
Yes and Intel working on a 48 core chip.
Also it doesn't matter if the application you are running isn't designed for multi cores, most of the time this isn't even possible. People are still forgetting that one application isn't EVERYTHING that runs on a CPU, there are a lot of processes that run at the same time and thus benefit from multi core architecture.
Someone please move this useless thread.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 48 core chip intel now intel has started as a multi core gpu , they started designing it as larabee gpu which later turned into the product which is released right now .sadly its not destined for desktop but for high performance computing.
《Samsung rom》

CPU/Processor Showdown - HTC One vs Galaxy S4

Which processow will be better, Exynos 5 Octa or A simple Snapdragon 600 quad?
In my POV, Octa will be useless since it will be a battery hog and no apps really use that much cores and power. The S600 will be more efficient for day-to-day use since it consumes less power and will actually be used.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Sent from a dark and unknown place
Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 P3100

I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
AndreiLux said:
Misconception #1: Samsung didn't design this, ARM did. This is not some stupid marketing gimmick.
Misconception #2: You DON'T need to have all 8 cores online, actually, only maximum 4 cores will ever be online at the same time.
Misconception #3: If the workload is thread-light, just as we did hot-plugging on previous CPUs, big.LITTLE pairs will simply remain offline under such light loads. There is no wasted power with power-gating.
Misconception #4: As mentioned, each pair can switch independently of other pairs. It's not he whole cluster who switches between A15 and A7 cores. You can have only a single A15 online, together with two A7's, while the fourth pair is completely offline.
Misconception #5: The two clusters have their own frequency planes. This means A15 cores all run on one frequency while the A7 cores can be running on another. However, inside of the frequency planes, all cores run at the same frequency, meaning there is only one frequency for all cores of a type at a time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing

I hope that the overclocking or higher clock rate doesn't produce Moment-esque results.

Alsybub said:
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.

crawlgsx said:
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah. I see. Different hardware for different regions. Like the One X.
Even though it's eight cores it is probably complete overkill. Yet another bigger number to put on marketing. How many apps will actually use that? How many apps use four cores at the moment?
There have been some articles about multiple cores being more for point of sale than for the end user. Even if you're signing up for a contract right now I doubt that much would be making use of it in two years time. So, the future proofing argument is moot.
It'll be interesting to see. Of course the galaxy builds of Android will use the cores. With things like the stay awake feature and pip it is useful. Outside of the OS I can't see it being necessary.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk HD

The "octa" core processor is complete bullsh*t. Imo, 2/4 cores are perfectly fine as long as they optimize it and perfect the hardware, why stack 8 cores when only 4 work at one time and no app will use all that power.
They should've focused on design to make it look less like a toy phone and use better finish, instead.
Oh the marketing..
Not HTC or whatever fanboy, just stating my opinion.

rotchcrocket04 said:
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good read, thanks for taking the time to post it. Surprised no-one has mentioned that we need this in our Ones. Would certainly help with the battery.

Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.

Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app

Squirrel1620 said:
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.

Nekromantik said:
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll just stick with the one and wait for the 4.2 update. By then we should have custom kernels to overclock ourselves
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app

Here you go

Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.

hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know all 8 can run at the same time? Has Samsung demonstrated that already? Any links?
Also what would be the speed if all 8 are running at the same time?
Also did you see that an Intel dual core @2GHz beat the Exynos Octa in benchmarks!!! So all 8 cores running at slower speed might not be very good actually. It might even slow down things even more...
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!

joslicx said:
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?

backfromthestorm said:
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its all about bragging rights really. Same as Samsung is doing with regards to Octa.
The the chip that could run at 3GHz could also very well run at 1GHz at just 0.6V (so consuming far lesser power than anything else in the market). A dual core at 1GHz is still good enough for all mundane tasks like playing videos or internet browsing etc. So in practice it would have been a very efficient solution. It was a real innovation really. Sadly the company did not have money to pour more funds into the program and has shut it.
It was demonstrated at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in february this year.
Anyway point is, we did not need extra set of power efficient cores like Samsung is doing. We ran the same cores that could do crazy high speeds and even crazier power efficient mode! Thats a very neat solution.
Heres a press link: http://www.itproportal.com/2013/02/25/mwc-2013-exclusive-dual-core-st-ericsson-novathor-l8580-soc-crushes-competition-benchmarks/
To quote the article:
A continuous running test monitored by an infra-red reader showed that the 3GHz prototype smartphone remained cooler as it uses less energy and in some scenarios, it could add up to five hours battery life in a normal usage scenario
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, no. At least not in my opinion. Octacore means 8 cpu cores on one cpu-chip.
I would see it like this:
You have 2 houses on your lawn which are beside each other. Every house has 4 rooms. You have to switch houses to open up the rooms. Just like the Exynos "Octa" has to, since it cannot run both CPU's at the same time.
If you are in a house with 8 rooms, you cannot simply be in all 8 rooms at once. You can connect the open doors between all the rooms, and since your in that house, you can freely walk in every room. But not with that implementation.
I wouldn't call the Exynos "Octa" an Octacore, its a dual CPU system with a 2x4 cores, with the difference that regular desktop dual CPU systems can use both CPU units at once, but not like the Exynos "Octa". Still, dual quad system comes closer than a pure octacore system.
This is kind of a hybrid. Nice technology for a mobile device, but at the same time, kind of unneeded / inefficient, compared to regular quadcore systems. Even the Tegra 3 system with 4 active cores and 1 companion core for standby tasks seems more efficient (in terms of "used space" and ressources).
Ah well let's see how the supposed and so called "octacore" will score in the future...

processor differences
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????

dawg00201 said:
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They should be identical. I think its just a manufacturer choice. But it could also be associated to termals or battery.
Cause Samsung took the higher frequency chips, there is the possibility that they also get the "better" chips: Lower Voltage for the same frequency. But thats just an assumption.

Which processor is/should be faster?

Hi I currently have an S3 i9300 and my company requires me to install MobileIron app and encrypt the whole phone; I find this slows down my phone considerably and often times I need to wait almost a minute for my app drawer to display my apps or some 20 seconds for camera to start.
Don't know if my experience with the S3 i9300 is only because of encryption app or also my processor-ram specs combination is not powerful enough to get a smooth experience.
So I'm looking to upgrade to an S4 but I don't know which version should I get based on which should be the faster one?
Should I get the 1.9GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 quad-core processor or a 1.6GHz Exynos Octa-core processor?
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

etereo said:
Hi I currently have an S3 i9300 and my company requires me to install MobileIron app and encrypt the whole phone; I find this slows down my phone considerably and often times I need to wait almost a minute for my app drawer to display my apps or some 20 seconds for camera to start.
Don't know if my experience with the S3 i9300 is only because of encryption app or also my processor-ram specs combination is not powerful enough to get a smooth experience.
So I'm looking to upgrade to an S4 but I don't know which version should I get based on which should be the faster one?
Should I get the 1.9GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 quad-core processor or a 1.6GHz Exynos Octa-core processor?
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Octa core variant is marginally faster but does not support 4g
Snapdragon Is little slow compare to Octa core but support 4g
u can choose as per ur need
Both are good device

the i9500 is faster even though it is really a quad core phone and only 4 cores can be activated at the same time. but I've seen somewhere that Samsung said with android 5 update the phone will be a real octa core and all eight cores can be used simultaneously.

The change to a i9500/9505 for you will be very good because the s3 I9300 only has 1gig of ram compared to the i9500/i9505 that have new processors and 2gigs of ram. That extra ram will definitely make a difference.
Sent from my SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2

Octa core :good:

Hamoonfarsa said:
the i9500 is faster even though it is really a quad core phone and only 4 cores can be activated at the same time. but I've seen somewhere that Samsung said with android 5 update the phone will be a real octa core and all eight cores can be used simultaneously.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you saying, Android 5 doesn't even exist. Also the Exynos 5410 won't allow all 8 cores only the exynos 5420 can which is only in the Note 3

So based on what you said, I could even consider the Note3 which has 3gigs of ram and expect even better smoother performance? Saying I wouldn't mind the extra real state needs if I could realistically expect a noticeable improvement over currently described S3 conditions...
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

4core is faster. clocked at 1.9

etereo said:
So based on what you said, I could even consider the Note3 which has 3gigs of ram and expect even better smoother performance? Saying I wouldn't mind the extra real state needs if I could realistically expect a noticeable improvement over currently described S3 conditions...
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If u can go for the note 3 and u don't mind it's size ... go for the note 3 and never look back ... but i suggest u wait if you can ofc for about a month to see how the s800 against the 5420 exynos compares ... it not so much about the ram except if you are a really heavy multitasker but the cpu and gpu which we know for sure that in the snapdragon case it's a considerable improvement especially in the gpu department and we ve yet to see how the new exynos chipset will compare to it's older sibling ...

crzykiller said:
What are you saying, Android 5 doesn't even exist. Also the Exynos 5410 won't allow all 8 cores only the exynos 5420 can which is only in the Note 3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what I'm talking about. And for now note 3 is not octa core either.

Just get straight to the point!

Right, I cannot make my mind up so I thought I would come on here, il make it short.
Which has better performance - Snapdragon 800 OR Exynos 5420
I don't give a flying f*** about 4G or 4K. Which one has better performance i.e which is faster?

hayat55 said:
Right, I cannot make my mind up so I thought I would come on here, il make it short.
Which has better performance - Snapdragon 800 OR Exynos 5420
I don't give a flying f*** about 4G or 4K. Which one has better performance i.e which is faster?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would say the Snapdragon 800 because more devs would get it= more roms, better clock speed, better battery life because of chipset enhancements, faster charging because of chipset enhancements. If none of those matter to you get the Exynos version.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

hayat55 said:
Right, I cannot make my mind up so I thought I would come on here, il make it short.
Which has better performance - Snapdragon 800 OR Exynos 5420
I don't give a flying f*** about 4G or 4K. Which one has better performance i.e which is faster?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Define performance.
Then we talk. My definition of performance is much different from that of my neighbour.

Dont you think you are showing too much attitude? How hard is it to say please? And snapdragon and exynos benchmarks are about the same

XDA HellHound said:
Dont you think you are showing too much attitude? How hard is it to say please? And snapdragon and exynos benchmarks are about the same
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be technical, it seems that Exynos benchmarks are slightly higher. However, I believe that is without the HMP update. With that, scores will skyrocket.

I can't make my mind up whether to get snapdragon 800 version or exynos 5420. By performance i mean which can do more multitasking and which can run apps faster etc

From what I've seen the scores are indeed about the same on the benchmark front. They will both be good! I'm guessing the s800 will get more dev support and probably cm. It will all be your choice, do you want lte or not.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

Sammath said:
From what I've seen the scores are indeed about the same on the benchmark front. They will both be good! I'm guessing the s800 will get more dev support and probably cm. It will all be your choice, do you want lte or not.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One thing that pushes me towards the exynos is that it has 1866 ram speed whereas snapdragon only has 800
Which do you think will be better in the long run?

^^^ forgot to mention that because exynos has higher ram speed then that means quicker performance.
So, which one should I get? Will there really be any difference between the performance of exynos 5420 and snapdragon 800?

You really do seem to have an attitude in your posts. Anyways, the phone isn't out yet so all anybody has is benchmarks to go by. Not a lot of real world use reviews out there to compare the two.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4

I guess the ram speed can be neglected in real life usage. The s4 with the s600 feels the same as the octa version to me. And that is while the octa s4 obliterated the s600 in Antutu and some other Benchmarks. Like I've said before, if you want lte and better rom support get the s800 one. If you're really spec whoring get a 8 core exynos.
Anyways, from what I've seen so far the s800 seems to be faster in Antutu but not that much so I guess they will be at the same level of performance.
I would get any device I could get which for me is the s800 since I'm from the Netherlands.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

S800
LTE
Better support
Benchmark mean absolutely nothing and are a terrible way if measuring a phone. I've seen plenty if phones have high numbers but real world experience sucked.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

Easy. Snapdragon since there will be much more support for it from developers.

Also, don't forget, the 8-core is a lie
You have your normal 4-cores with an additional 4 'smaller' cores to handle always running less intense things. I really don't see the advantage to this, you don't get more out of benchmarks because those 4 'smaller' cores won't be used, except by some obscure background task that wouldn't slow down the benchmark anyways. It also won't help with the battery life, no matter how you spin it a clock cycle is a clock cycle.
The only time you will see gains from small memory speed increases are in things like calculating pie, so again, useless for day-to-day stuff. As other have stated, support. Qualcomm based will get AOSP based roms without any problems.
If you are looking to flaunt your meaningless bigger numbers around, by all means, get the 8-core.

designgears said:
Also, don't forget, the 8-core is a lie
You have your normal 4-cores with an additional 4 'smaller' cores to handle always running less intense things. I really don't see the advantage to this, you don't get more out of benchmarks because those 4 'smaller' cores won't be used, except by some obscure background task that wouldn't slow down the benchmark anyways. It also won't help with the battery life, no matter how you spin it a clock cycle is a clock cycle.
The only time you will see gains from small memory speed increases are in things like calculating pie, so again, useless for day-to-day stuff. As other have stated, support. Qualcomm based will get AOSP based roms without any problems.
If you are looking to flaunt your meaningless bigger numbers around, by all means, get the 8-core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true anymore. They are releasing an update to run all 8 cores at the same time to make it a true octacore
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 4

kiter86 said:
Not true anymore. They are releasing an update to run all 8 cores at the same time to make it a true octacore
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source? Cause idk about that....

kiter86 said:
Not true anymore. They are releasing an update to run all 8 cores at the same time to make it a true octacore
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought they were. Wasn't it something like a Heterogeneous or HMP update.

SgtGoldy said:
Source? Cause idk about that....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
was news a few weeks ago.......
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...-update-to-become-true-octa-core-chip_id47353
http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...a-software-new-hardware-not-needed-after-all/

kiter86 said:
Not true anymore. They are releasing an update to run all 8 cores at the same time to make it a true octacore
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It can't be a true 8-core. The extra 4 cores are far less powerful then the other 4.

designgears said:
It can't be a true 8-core. The extra 4 cores are far less powerful then the other 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me tell you some preludes:
The reason behind using 8 cores was to put in a pair of four aggressively powerful quad processors like the cortex A15 with another pair of less powerful yet more power efficient four quad processors like cortex A7.
This is the main intention behind putting all these 8 cores of ARM's big.little architecture. The purpose is to let the A15s handle power hungry tasks like web page opening, playing an asphalt 8 game etc while the a7s would handle "simple" tasks. This is more vividly demoed in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwbeb08W27U
Now, the way you are saying it is not a true 8 core processor as if you are
1. demanding 8 cortex A15 processors using 28 nm technology.
Do you know/have any idea what could happen if they all be available online at the same time in this case?
or
2. you knew there was a "true" octa core processor in the world, to be (or already) implemented in another device. IF SO, point us to that device and also explain what is the ideal to call a processor true 8 core.
It was never an intention of ARM to put eight A15s (for example) available for heterogeneous multi-processing.
Go here. Again 64 bit A57s are to be paired with 32 bit A52s.
Even the S4 equipped with exynos 5410 is an octa core processor device. It is just that the bloody CCI (cache coherence interconnector, CCI400) was crippled to enable all the 8 cores available online. Once the 8 cores packed in a SoC like this it is an octa core processor device. Whether or not you like it to call true 8 core.
Samsung/ARM worked on this and released another SoC (in the form of upgraded exynos) which has a working CCI that is free from the above mentioned flaw(s) which will have Cluster Migration by default and will receive the update that is made from Linaro team to enable all the 8 cores available online and therefore will become a "TRULY WORKING" 8 core processor which is implemented in Note 3.
These are facts, these have been heavily discussed in the general section of Samsung Galaxy S4 forums.
Oh, another thing- just because all these 8 cores are made to be available online it does not mean all the 8 cores will be working Simultaneously regardless of what application is in the process. Depending on the needs of the app(s) all these 8 cores (ranging from 1 core to the extreme case- 8 cores) can be used. If an app needs 4 cores, they can be used. If it needs 6 cores then they can be used. If it needs 8 cores then they can be used.
I personally am curious to see how it be going when all the 8 cores were used for an app.
And to the OP who's demadning a straight answer, my thoughts:
we do not know anything atm how power efficient and cool it'd be to have the HMP doing all these tasks. This requires
real life buyers buy the device
start playing with it
see how hot the device becomes (compared to another exynos device like s4).
It actually depends on those stuffs. You demand the answer as if we all knew from the beginning how exynos 5420 gonna perform in real life.